Commission Report on the experience acquired by Member
States since the implementation of Council Directive
95/29/EC amending Directive 91/628/EEC concerning the
protection of animals during transport.

Legal base:



Document originated:

6 December 2000

Forwarded to the Council:

6 December 2000

Deposited in Parliament:

17 January 2001

Department:

Agriculture, Fisheries and Food

Basis of consideration:

EM of 8 February 2001

Previous Committee Report:

None

To be discussed in Council:

No date set

Committee's assessment:

Politically important

Committee's decision:

Cleared

Background

16.1 Although the first Community measures
for the protection of animals during transport were adopted in
1977, the arrangements which currently apply are set out in Council
Directives 91/628/EEC[49]
and 95/29/EC.[50]
These contain a number of detailed provisions, but in essence
they prohibit the transport of an animal unless it is fit, the
vehicle used complies with certain requirements, such as loading
densities, and is accompanied by a trained attendant, and those
transporting animals are registered by a competent Member State
authority. The Directives also require that, for journeys exceeding
eight hours, an itinerary (including any staging and transfer
points, where the animals may be rested) should be drawn up, and
food and water made available. Member States are required to carry
out inspections to ensure compliance with the various requirements,
and to take any action necessary to ensure the welfare of the
animals.

16.2 Council Directive 95/29/EC also required
the Commission to submit by 31 December 1999 a report to the Council
on its implementation. The present document represents a somewhat
belated response to the obligation.

The current document

16.3 The Commission says that, in putting
together this report, it has drawn upon the annual reports which
the Member States are required to submit to it, on inspection
reports of the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO), and on complaints
it has received from non-governmental organisations, including
the RSPCA.

16.4 Its main findings are:

 The low priority
given by some Member States to implementing the Directive

The Commission says that
this is one of the most frequent comments found in reports from
the FVO and non-governmental organisations, and involves such
shortcomings as the approval of non-compliant route plans, and
inaction over the transport of unfit animals. It also observes
that the difficulties are exacerbated by transporters operating
in different Member States, and the often confused nature of their
respective responsibilities.

 Difficulties in collecting Member
States' inspection reports

Although Member States have
an obligation to submit an annual report, the Commission says
that some have been very late in doing so, and that Greece has
yet to submit any report. Moreover, where reports have been provided,
they are frequently incomplete, and the lack of uniformity in
the data used makes it difficult to draw valid comparisons.

 Transport of horses

The Commission says that
the transport of horses for slaughter from central and eastern
Europe is a particular area of concern, in that the animals travel
long distances, mainly by road, and that, because of inadequate
laws in the exporting or transit countries, they reach the borders
of the Community insufficiently rested, poorly watered, and not
fed. Moreover, the vehicles used are frequently inappropriate
and over-loaded. The problem is further compounded by inadequate
border inspections on arrival, particularly in Italy, which accounts
for over 80% of such imports.

 Inadequate road vehicles

The Commission says that
the use of poorly designed, ill-maintained and dirty vehicles
is commonly reported, and raises animal health, as well as welfare,
concerns.

 Non-compliance with route plans and
travelling time limits

The Commission says that,
although these are not considered as frequent deficiencies by
Member States, the FVO identifies them as two of the major technical
deficiencies. It has also commented that insufficient checks on
plans are carried out at departure, but that real difficulties
do arise in applying the various provisions to multi-leg journeys.

 Negligence and poor handling of animals

The transport of unfit animals
is a main finding both for Member States and the FVO, which the
Report suggests may require a more precise definition of what
constitutes unfitness to travel.

 Insufficient ventilation and overloading
of vehicles used in long-distance transport

In contrast to most Member
States, the FVO and non-governmental organisations consider insufficient
ventilation to be a serious problem, leading to over-heating,
suffering and eventually death. These problems are increased by
overloading.

 Approval of transporters

The Report notes that transporters
have no obligation to carry during transport any documentary evidence
of their approval, which makes it unnecessarily difficult to check
if approval has been given. Also, reports of any infringements
are not always followed up by the Member State of registration.
These weaknesses lower the effectiveness of inspections, and the
dissuasive effect of the imposition of penalties.

16.5 Against this background, the Commission
says that it intends to present proposals in the near future to
improve the conditions under which animals are transported. It
suggests that these should include a greater priority being given
to animal welfare issues by Member States, including the allocation
of adequate resources to apply the current legislation; harmonised
procedures for the registration and certification of transporters;
where long-distance cross-border journeys are involved, a proper
exchange of information between the authorities in the different
Member States on such matters as route plans; the need to improve
the welfare conditions of animals arriving at the Community's
external frontiers, particularly from central and eastern Europe,
and to ensure they are treated properly once within the Community;
and the need for the Community to negotiate a revision to the
European Convention on the Protection of Animals during International
Transport. The Commission also identifies the particular need
for additional measures for the protection of horses during transport,
covering such aspects as their separation, the numbers to be carried
in any given road vehicle, and the range of temperatures within
which they may be transported. These measures would be supplemented
by a number of more technical changes relating to the format of
the required route plan, the definition of unfit animals, the
form of certification to accompany animals during transport, the
need to monitor temperature and humidity inside vehicle compartments,
and the harmonisation of Member States' annual inspection reports.

16.6 In addition, the Commission has highlighted
anumber of longer-term initiatives, on which it says scientific
advice is necessary. These include travelling time limits and
resting periods, loading densities, and the stress arising from
loading and unloading operations. It also wishes to consider whether
further improvements are needed in such areas as the training
and qualifications of those involved in animal transport, and
to examine measures to encourage the slaughter of animals closer
to the places where they are raised.

The Government's view

16.7 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 8
February 2001, the Parliamentary Secretary (Commons) at the Ministry
of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr Elliot Morley) says that
the Government is committed to high standards of animal welfare,
and that, whilst it has stated a preference for a trade in meat
instead of the long-distance transport of animals for slaughter,
it has made considerable efforts to ensure that Community rules
are met whilst animals are within UK jurisdiction. It has also
encouraged other Member States to give animal welfare a high priority.
He adds that the actions recommended in the Commission's report
in many cases reflect those developed by the UK, and that the
report is welcome as a forerunner to the anticipated proposals
for amending Council Directive 91/628/EEC, which "should
be brought forward without delay".

16.8 As regards the likely cost of the Commission's
recommendations, the Minister says that the majority of those
relating to improved enforcement, communication and clarity of
the rules are unlikely to impose an increased burden on the UK
or UK transporters, but that, subject to clarification when detailed
proposals are issued, there may be some costs arising from the
measures proposed for the transport of horses, and in relation
to unfit animals. Similarly, the longer-term proposals to encourage
a reduction in long-distance transport for slaughter are likely
to have direct financial implications.

16.9 The Minister indicates that, when the
Commission issues formal proposals to amend the Directive, the
Government will consult interested parties, and submit a further
Explanatory Memorandum and a Regulatory Impact Assessment.

Conclusion

16.10 Since this document is simply a
Commission Report, which is likely to be followed by proposals
for legislation, we are content to clear it. Nevertheless, the
Commission has identified a number of significant, and disturbing,
shortcomings in the way in which many Member States have discharged
their responsibilities in this area, and we are therefore drawing
it to the attention of the House.